Thursday, November 5, 2009

Refusing Gays' Right To Marriage While Remaining Friendly?

"Every State That Has Been Given the Opportunity Has Banned It"

That's what my husband said when he heard the election results yesterday morning.

Maine, my state, had a referendum question on gay marriage on Tuesday. As a state, we had already voted to ban gay marriage years ago, but the Maine state legislature decided to overturn the will of the people and passed a law to allow gay marriage in Maine. The Maine people put a people's veto on the ballot and once again denied homosexuals the right to marriage.

I may have a different view on gay marriage than most Christians. I don't think that banning gay marriage will ultimately lead to more people to follow Christ. But that is not the point of this post.

Can't we all just be nice?

Regardless of how you feel about gay marriage, the Maine state legislature was wrong in overturning the will of the people. They are elected to serve the will of the people. That alone was reason enough for me to support this people's veto.

The leaders of the anti-gay marriage side did not play nice, though. They talked about how gay marriage would be taught in schools, implying it would turn our kids gay if gay marriage were allowed. But the gay marriage law that the legislature passed had nothing to do with public school policy. There were some people who were involved in the pro-gay marriage side who were also pushing for a change in public school policy, but this law had nothing to do with it.

The anti-gay marriage side, in my opinion, had a strong argument against the law the legislature passed without lying. Yet most ads I heard and saw were about homosexuality being taught in the public schools, which had nothing to do with the people's veto.

Can't we all just be nice?

Although I'm glad that the people's veto was passed, it left a bad taste in my mouth. I don't like being on the same side as people who based their campaign on lies. The ends don't justify the means.

Being nice will get you further in life, both in your personal and financial life. You may still get your way without being nice, but it may end up feeling like a hollow victory.


Anonymous said...

I respect your opinion and I think you are a good person. I never understand the kind of people who rail against everything. Attitudes like that don't help bring more people to Christ. When I hear someone who is screaming out against others all the time, I always think "who is going to want to be like that angry, shrieking person?"

I am not a Christian but I did grow up in a conservative church. There were a few wonderful people there but the vast majority of them were quite hateful (not to mention cheating on spouses, etc). I think if more of them had been better examples I would have been more inclined to stay rather than running out of there as soon as I turned 18!


Jen said...

The will of the people is only fair when it does not discriminate against another group of people.

I wish more states would allow gay marriage. It does not affect heterosexual people at all.

Anonymous said...

There is always the danger, of course, of the will of the people becoming the tyranny of the majority. A pitfall that those in a democracy need to be constantly mindful about.

Anonymous said...

Basic Human Rights should not be decided by the "will of the people." The government is supposed to protect us all, equally, under the law.

Atheist Mama said...

I agree 100% with Jen.

The "will of the people" is discriminatory and SHOULD be overturned.

Gay marriage in no way effects the heterosexual married life and isn't going to be "turning" our children why is it any of our concern, really?

Anyway, I once heard a pro-gay marriage comedian say something to the tune of everyone should be able to get married because really, "all marriage is gay"...hahaha!

I'd have to agree with that... ;P

Shay said...

I live in Maine and was No on 1, so are you saying that for you the reason for voting to repeal the law was because you felt the legislators were not listening to you?

I have been lurking for a while and just needed to say something. I respect your right to vote any which way you want the problem is that in showing the legislators who is right, peeople forget this law was about real life families. I am a Christian who used to be anti gay marriage but it was from getting to know Gay and Lesbian families that my views changed.

It may feel good to stick it to the man, but I know many who are hurting over this choice. I have been wanting to beleive that folks voted to repeal this because of fear, fear of the unknown.

Lorrie said...

Discrimination is never fair. Never.

I'm Lori...and maybe I'm you, too. said...

Slavery was the will of the people. Owning people may have been popular, but it was never right. It may even be in the Bible, but that doesn't make it Godly.

However, I give you credit, Emily. While this is something you believe in and I oppose, I could not agree more with your feelings on how it is being handled by the opposition.

In my opinion, if your position requires lying to garner support, than your support isn't "the will of the people." It's the will of the mislead.

Kudos for a good argument. I always appreciate reasoned, intelligent debate from the other side.

Anonymous said...

What if women's rights had been left up to the electorate? Or how about slavery?

Dixie said...

Emily, I wonder how you would feel if YOUR rights to live how you want to live were put up to the popular vote. It's not right. The rights of the minorities should not be put up to popular vote. I hope these elections result in some lawsuits that get to the supreme court. Are you against interracial marriage? I wonder what a popular vote on the rights of interracial couples would have looked like in the civil rights era. It wasn't popular, but it was right. Nice Christian compassion you got there.

Emily said...

Lori, thank you for actually reading the post and understanding what I said. I wish more people actually read it before commenting.

Shay, I'm sure that most did vote yes out of fear, unfortunately fear created by lies, and I think that is horrible.

With today's ever growing government, I will stand by the rights of the people to choose.

missmessy said...

I think it doesn't matter what the people say, or what the legislators say. It matters to me what God says. God says marriage is a sacred union between a man and a woman. Every reference to homosexuality in the bible is a sin (albeit no greater sin than any other). We should follow what God says as a country and stop listening to 'popular opinion'. Why is God so unpopular? Because obeying him is hard?

Anonymous said...

God said shellfish is an abomination, so when is Maine going to put a referendum up on banning lobster?

Jenny Brewer said...

Massachusetts has had the opportunity and has not banned gay marriage.

Anonymous said...

Can we be nice? No. The time for niceness has passed. It was RIGHT for the legislature to toss aside the "will of the people" as the will of the people was DENYING RIGHTS to others and that is not right.

Anonymous said...

I agree with you exactly.You took the words right out of my mouth. A second point worth mentioning, we better watch what we allow our corrupt officials to decide is law.

Kelly said...

You can't put people's rights up for referendum vote. That is exactly why we have judges and politicians.

It doesn't matter what the will of the people when you have people denied equal protection under the law.

To allow the public to put up a referendum on civil rights is putting up a referendum on whether some people are more human than others.

Emily said...

Jenny, the Mass legislature passed their gay marriage law in 2007. The Mass legislature won't let the people vote on it until 2012.,2933,282535,00.html?sPage=fnc/us/issues

Missmessy, although I agree with God on homosexuality, that is not the only issue I see here. I see the gov't disregarding the will of the people to be an increasing problem and I will stand against it where ever I can.

Jessica said...

I live in Maine. I voted No on 1. I was so saddened when I saw the results yesterday. And angered.

The yes on 1 crowd was celebrating taking away the rights of families to enjoy the same legal protections they, themselves enjoy.

This has never been a religious issue. This is a LEGAL issue. The role of government is to protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority. We have failed our fellow citizens.

People who voted yes on 1 should be ashamed. There are people who are truly hurting as a result of this election. And guess what? They're no less gay than they were yesterday. They're not hiding in closets because they don't have the right to be married. They are still here, and they will continue to fight for what is right and just and fair.

We will eventually win this battle, as the older voters are replaced by the younger voters.

Also, I am sickened and angered that churches spent so much time and money on this fight when those resources could be better spent on helping those in need.

Andrew Wilder said...

THANK YOU for pointing out that the "Yes" on 1 campaign was dishonest. It's incredibly frustrating that they are allowed to lie so blatantly, and that they're not being held accountable. This calls for a class-action lawsuit!

Not surprisingly, they ran some of the *exact* same ads that worked so well during the Prop 8 campaign last year in California. It was actually the same marketing firm, using the same scripts (they changed the actors and the name of the state--that's it). They're just selling FEAR, plain and simple.

I'm all for the will of the people, as I try to be an optimist and believe that people will usually do what's right in the end...But that only happens if citizens are truly informed with the real facts.

(Here's a trick to help you determine what's right: Substitute the word "black" for the word "gay" when thinking about any gay-rights issues. Civil rights should apply to all people...that's the point.)

Jenny said...

MissMissy- No snark at all, but this is something I truly don't understand and wish someone could explain to me: If that's what you believe with regards to your religion that's fine. If your church doesn't want to marry gays that's their choice. But why should any laws be made in this country based upon religion? Isn't that something that is up to an individual and their relationship with their God? Legislating religious beliefs just seems like a very scary and slippery slope to me...

crabcakes said...


The people only "chose" with a 53% margin. I know that eventually this will be a non issue. I respect your right to follow certain beliefs about families. But I'd appreciate the right to follow my own.

I have been married for nearly 10 years and we have three beautiful children. I'd like to be able to cross into any state without worrying about my family being protected.

When I first read your title of the post, I thought "Oh great, now I'm going to have to not come here and not give her money through webhits" because honestly I hoped you would avoid the topic because I LIKE coming here.

I was pleasantly surprised to see you so respectful about it. I hope that when Maine like all states has the people decide to allow my marriage there, then you will also be as supportive of the people's choice. Because that day WILL come. And my marriage hurts no one.

Captain Cleavage said...

actually interacial marriage was illigial up through the 50's and in some states the 60's.

I do not belive the will of the people should be overlooked but I also do not belive human rights issues should be put up for a vote either.

Stephanie said...

Love your neighbor as you love yourself...If you'd want those rights for yourself, they should be afforded to your neighbor.

McDorky said...

There are plenty of Christians (myself included) who will argue AGAINST what some people "say" the Bible says about homosexuality. I could go on and on quoting and discussing the historial "sitz im leben" behind both Hebrew Scriptures and the Christian Testament, but the point is this - the Bible is NOT black and white, and there are wide differences in interpretation by even the most fundamentalist of churches. To deny people basic American rights to make a legal commitment to one another (including make legal decisions with and for each other) based upon the Bible (when this is a nation founded on religious freedome and separation of chuch and state) is wrong. Should there be any ACTUAL evidence that homosexuality is a deviant behavior that infringes on the rights of others, that would be another story. But homosexuals, whether or not you believe they chose their plight (I don't), are minorities whose rights should not be subjected to the will of a "people" who seem to find it fair and just to decide a people's fate based upon their own religious beliefs as opposed to the Constitution of this country.

McDorky said...

That being said, Emily, I do appreciate that it seems that you ACTUALLY think critically about issues as opposed to voting blindly as your church or pastor tell you. I know we don't agree, but I do appreciate that you recognize how ludicrous it is for certain groups to be spreading nonsense about schools and gay marriage somehow "turning" a child gay. It is simply a lie, there is no science or research to back any of it up, and just as they believe (I am sure) that homosexuals will face judgment for their sins, so do I feel about those who spread hateful, vengeful lies about others.

Elizabeth said...

Since this post is turning into more of homosexuality is a right than the government vs. people post Emily started with I will chime in on what I believe.
While everyone has a right to live their life how they choose, they do not have a right to change how marriage is viewed. In my eyes, a marriage is between a man and a woman. If marriage becomes something that everyone can obtain (whether between a couple of the same sex,a man wanting more than one wife, a brother or sister, a woman and a goat) than it is no longer a marriage. As a Christian, I take what the Bible says and know that it is between a man and a woman.
That said, while I do not agree with the act of homosexuality, I do think that if a homosexual couple decides to spend the rest of their life with someone that there needs to be a law to protect that. Such as a man and woman have a common law marriage after a time I do think that the government should make some bill that can pass that will allow gay couples to be seen as a couple in the eyes of the law. I just don't think that it should be called a marriage.

Berean Wife said...


I agree that in the US the laws are written such that the people are the deciding factor. So in that sense the people are allowed to decide what is acceptable or not. However, unless there is some governing authority above the will of the people and our government we will become so totally depraved that it will put Hitler to shame. Humans are ruled by their own selfish desires and once a human race learns that they can vote to benefit themselves we are doomed. While the below quotes deal with money, they also apply to anything a person could desire; abortion, slavery, racial discrimination, mercy killing, etc. There would be no end.

"Democracy will fail when people realize they can vote themselves money from the public purse." Alexis de Toqueville

"When the people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic." Benjamin Franklin

When a higher authority no longer governs people, they themselves become that higher authority. Until the cultural revolution of the 60’s even those who claimed no serious religious affiliation still operated under what we might call some semblance of common decency here in the US due to the religious heritage we began with. Murder, homosexuality, and abortion were all repugnant to the average citizen. Once the courts and the voters started allowing them, then the culture as a whole became more accepting, they have lost that common decency that held for so many years. What will be our final state at the rate we are going?

But I must disagree with the schools issue, they were not lying, they actually have plenty of basis for thier statements from the homosexual agenda’s own writing. While your law may not have dealt with the schools as such, it is clear from the homosexual agenda that they desire that homosexuality be taught as normal and acceptable to all school age children. While you may personally disagree with homosexuality and feel that homeschooling will protect your children, we must be concerned for all the children exposed to that agenda. Not only that they will not be content until all children are taught to accept homosexuality as normal. That in itself will endanger your right to homeschool in the future.

Kevin Jennings, Obama’s “Safe Schools Czar”, is founder of GLSEN and encourages the education of students about homosexuality. This group has not only been advocating for tolerance but also has been teaching children about explicit techniques for years.

I would encourage you to think about the larger ramifications of a seemingly simple law to allow homosexual marriage. It is farther reaching than you can imagine. Even down to removing verses from the Bible as “hate speech”. The vote in your state was just the first ripples in the pond of a tidal wave that the pro-homosexual agenda wants to unleash.

Berean Wife

P.S. Amen MissMessy!

missmessy said...

Jenny-America was founded on three documents: The Declaration of Independence; The Paris Peace Treaty of 1783, and the Constitution. These documents give conclusive proof that America is a Christian nation. One does not need a law degree or a degree in history to grasp this truth. It is obvious to anyone who does not have an agenda.
My best friend in the whole world is a lesbian, and I love her just the same. But I wouldn't lie to her and tell her that her actions are not a sin, just to be nice.
I'm just saying that as a country we need to obey God. If you don't agree with the policies of the Christian nation in which you live, then you are the minority.
Read Leviticus 18
Romans 1:24-32
1 Corinthians 6
1 Timothy 1

missmessy said...

Berean Wife, sister you have said what i was trying to say but in a much clearer way! Praise God!

Jessica said...

Berean Wife,
Where, exactly, does one get a copy of this "gay agenda"? I have yet to see one but often see references.

And, yes, children SHOULD be taught to be accepting of others, including those who are homosexual. Of course, even the bible teaches that, does it not?

And perhaps a little more understanding and a little less harassment in schools would help to lower the suicide rate among young homosexuals. I don't see that as a bad thing.

It's all absurd. Please, if these are your attitudes, DO homeschool your children so my publically schooled children will be safe from this school thought. I will teach them tolerance, kindess, understanding and acceptance. What are you teaching?

Audrey at Barking Mad! said...

The biggest issue with this "People's Veto" vote for me, being a Maine resident, was the fact that the ads were misleading to say the least, and downright dishonest in other cases. They were so bad that they were almost laughable!

missmessy said...

I personally have 4 children and teach them also tolerance, kindness, understanding and acceptance. I also add SPEAKING THE TRUTH IN LOVE. Ephesians 4:15. I love you and want you to go to heaven with me. To call your sin perfectly ok, would be the same as telling you that its ok to murder, ok to lie, ok to curse...I want the best life for you. I want you to know the Love that Jesus Christ has for you and to walk in the Truth. We all sin! Thats why we need Jesus in the first place remember?

Emily said...

Elizabeth, you said it exactly the way I would have, except I would have left out the goat. (:

Berean Wife, I understand the greater context of this fight. It is much larger than this nation and these laws. People's eternity is at steak. People may want to teach children about homosexuality in a way that we don't agree with, BUT THAT WAS NOT WHAT THIS LAW WAS ABOUT. Lying is as much of a sin as any other, and should be seen as a serious sign of this culture's moral decline, as much as any other socially acceptable sin is.

Berean Wife said...


The homosexual agenda can be found in their writing and speeches without any problem. Just as the Nazi agenda could be found in their writings and speeches.

My children are taught to treat all individuals as created by God and as valued persons. But see we as Christians are attacked and harassed continually as “hate mongers” if we bother to warn another that there will come a day that they will give an account to God, although that is a loving act. (Now granted there are bizarre people who claim to do so in violent and attacking ways, but they are not true Christians.)

I’m teaching my children kindness, purity of thought and body, obedience to God’s Word, reference for a Holy God and to worship and serve Him forever. That will benefit them for eternity and not just here and now.


I have no clue about the ads in your state. I never said lying was OK or acceptable. I said that the Homosexuals do want their agenda taught in the schools and they will not be content until they are deemed not just as legally free, but protected such that no minister could possibly say that homosexuality is against God’s Word. God did create man and woman and institute marriage not man.

This law is no different to the gun control laws that have been enacted. It is whittling away one piece at a time to the moral fabric and freedom this nation was founded on. While this law may not have had wording concerning schools, it is part of the plan, it would have forced teachers when teaching about marriage to include teaching about homosexual unions as being equally valid. Once we are forced to accept homosexual marriages there will be no stopping the fall deeper into depravity. They do want to convert the children and have repeatedly said so.

I will leave this discussion since I find the majority accepting of homosexuality.

Berean Wife

SoMo said...

Can someone point out to me where marriage, of any kind, is a right? If it is simply a legal issue, then why is a civil union not enough? You can have all the same legal protection, but it is simply not called marriage.

For the record, I believe that marriage should be left to the churches and government should stay out of it.

Hopewell said...

At least Massachusetts has not banned gay marriage. You are free to hold any opinion you like--that's the beauty of our Country, but get the facts first.....

Emily said...

Hopewell, Massachusetts has not been given the opportunity to ban it. I said "Every State That Has Been Given the Opportunity Has Banned It."

Anonymous said...

So after all these eloquent posts about God and Christian nation and WWJD and PEOPLE'S ETERNAL SOULS AT STAKE OMG!!!! no one has an answer about the lobster?

Clisby said...


I don't know if this is what you have in mind, but I have long thought that the government should offer civil unions and churches should handle marriage. This is essentially what is done in some European countries - if you want the government to recognize your marriage, you go down to city hall and get a civil ceremony. You can do whatever the heck you want to with your church, but that has no standing in the eyes of the government. It really bugs me when people start giving religious arguments for or against gay marriage. The government should never, ever, ever, take God, or religion, or what's "sacred" into account. That's a church matter - let them worry about it. The government's only concern should be in enforcing the terms of the marriage contract, just like the government enforces the terms of a business contract.

Kelly said...


That is not historically accurate. The view of marriage has changed both in recent history and throughout history.

Kelly said...


It isn't a right, but it affords right and specifically offers protection under the law that is not afford to everyone. And no, a civil union is not the same. It is segregation, separate but equal....but separate never ends up equal.

If people are opposed to a legal marriage between 2 of the same gender than I propose we end a legal definition of marriage and the rights it confers. Then no one is having a civil right violated.

Emily said...

This post is about being nice. Comments that attack other readers will NOT be published.

Adrienne S. said...

Emily- I find it strange that you consider my commment not "nice" (I'm assuming that because it wasn't posted: ) but you find the comment likening the marriage of gay people to that of a woman and goat "nice"??

annie said...

Emily, I guess I'd just like to know how you'd feel about the will of the people if a very motivated group decided that Christianity was a harmful cult. Is it right to vote on that and potentially take away your right to practice your religion as you see fit?

Also, can someone put up a link for what "explicit practices" homosexuals teach in schools? I'm 26, and I definitely missed out on learning about gay sex in public schools. Curious.

Anonymous said...


Isn't the purpose of your blog about "How a family of 5 happily thrives on less than $1000 a month"? How does this post pretain to that?

You are just opening a HUGE can of worms with this one....

It's almost as if you are looking for an arguement!

Love your ideas on frugality though!!;)

Emily said...

Adrienne, it was the last part, which was a personal attack on another reader. If you want to recomment everything but the last part, it will be published.

annie, I fully expect that to happen, that the rights of Christians will one day be restricted in this country, if not in my lifetime, probably in my children's.

Anonymous said...

"annie, I fully expect that to happen, that the rights of Christians will one day be restricted in this country, if not in my lifetime, probably in my children's."

And by your logic, you'd be all for that and would not want your elected officials to do anything about it, right?

Anonymous said...

I find the post insinuating that the "gay agenda" is just like the "Nazi agenda" to be highly offensive, and yet it's still here.

crabcakes said...

If marriage is strictly religious, would you support men and women who are not religious to be able to obtain marriages? Because right now they can. Marriage isn't just a religious institution.

But let's say that it was.

My church (Unitarian Universalist) and my religion married me. Shouldn't my religious beliefs about marriage be respected too?

When someone can prove to me, really prove how my marriage to another woman has harmed them I'd be more inclined to understand why people are so afraid of it. But they can't because it doesn't.

And with only 53% of Maine voting to ban marriage, I actually take that as a positive sign. That number is going to go down as it always has historically.

But I fear even when it does there will be people who will still come up with something to justify why my marriage should be banned.

Clisby said...


I was about to just roll my eyes at that last comment and say, "Yeah, yeah, more 'Christians are under attack' nonsense". However, you don't come off as a loony; so, seriously, what makes you think the rights of Christians will one day be restricted in this country? Remember, we're talking about Christians - the people Republicans and Democrats pander to shamelessly. I live for the day that no politician would dream of telling us what church she/he attends. For the day no politician would *ever* invoke religious belief as a reason for any official action. What on earth would make you think Christians' rights would be restricted? They'll be the absolute last to go down.

Anonymous said...

I'm pretty sure that all "the gay agenda" is pushing is tolerance...and what is wrong with that? Doesn't it say in your bible 'judge not lest ye be judged?'

I'm also pretty sure that teaching tolerance in schools does not equal teaching the best gay sex techniques.

Anonymous said...

All of you homophobes need to get your heads out of your asses, and keep your religion out of our politics.

Anonymous said...

In reference to the lobsters...please read Luke 5:1-11.
Keep up the great blog, Emily! I enjoy it daily.

Anonymous said...

"They do want to convert the children and have repeatedly said so."

I'd like to know where they've said so, Berean Wife. I certainly haven't seen any such thing. I'm continually amazed and saddened by the attitude of self-proclaimed "Christians" in this regard. You're maligning an entire group of people, who are ALSO God's children. Some compassion, some understanding, some patience and kindness would be nice -- not this weird, baseless accusation of pushing a "gay agenda."

Adrienne S. said...

Thanks for the clarification about my comment Emily. I like the fact that you opened "a huge cans of worms" with this post, reading all the comments has empowered me to fight even harder for equal right for ALL.

Elizabeth said...

Adrienne S,
I was not compairing homesexuals to a goat. I should have been more clear in why I was posting about a goat, as I'm sure many people did not read that news here goes. A woman in another country fought to get a marriage license for marrying her goat. Yes, that is correct. And if I remember correctly, somehow she won and is now legally married to a goat. I probably shouldn't have added that last part.

My point being was that marriage IS between a man and woman. And if homosexuals want that to be changed then I see no reason why other couples shouldn't fight for those same rights...whether they are someone wanting more than one spouse, relatives wanting to get married, etc. I am agaisnt homosexuals trying to change what marriage is. BUT, I do agree that homoesxuals couples who want to commit their life to one another should be reconized by the law and have a legal union that the law reconizes.

Kelly said...

A can of worms indeed.
I was raised Catholic, which I realize is a far cry from fundamentalist Christianity, but I hesitate to even call myself Catholic. I love children, but I don't teach any classes at my church because I can't morally teach the story of Noah and the Ark when I don't believe in the bible's stance on homosexuality/women's roles/etc... I am a nice person because it's the right thing to do. I get no pleasure from being rude or hurtful. I don't see how people can joyfully participate in causing harm to others by denying them "rights" that cause them no harm back. Like someone else said, they are going to be no less gay regardless of how many people vote against them.
I'm not pro-gay marriage. I'm simply pro-marriage. Pro-two ALL consenting adults being afforded the same rights and privileges and labels. The slippery slope argument ends here, because the difference between Ellen DeGeneres and Portia de Rossi getting married and Dan Akroyd and Dakota Fanning tying the knot is that they are two consenting adults. I'm personally quite skeeved by incest, but honestly, I see no legal reason that it should not be allowed. Again, as long as all parties involved are in agreement.

Anonymous said...

What is wrong with just teaching out children acceptance of others and to see them for who they are as a person and not by gender, the color of their skin, or their sexual preference? Everyone is worth a chance to get to know.

As far as marriage. I think that we need to change any marriages that are for legal purposes to standard civil unions even if man and woman. If you want a "marriage" then that should be left up to the church. What it all boils down to is a simple term.

Whether or not you believe it is right or a sin, it is not up to YOU to judge. That is between the person and THEIR God. The bible teaches acceptance but so many "good" christians are closed minded to anything outside of their own views."

This whole thing should NEVER have been up for a public vote. When it comes to the rights of people, that is for the government to do just that, govern!

missmessy said...

crabcakes, Do Unitarian Universalists believe that the bible is the inspired word of God? I personally am more worried about doing what God says, then some study proving that homesexuality is bad for you. And I am not 'afraid' of homesexuality, i just hate what God hates and love what God loves.
and to Anonymous, you were referring to Matthew 7:1 and that is a great bible verse. I really don't believe I am judging anyone who is homosexual though. I understand that it is a sin, and I myself commit sin every day. I have sinful thoughts, attitudes, words, acts, that I am working hard to overcome. The point is, it is a sin. God says so, and I believe him.

Captain Cleavage said...

I really wish we could all just adapt to the Live and let Live way of life.

yes this country was based on seperation of church and was also based on religious freedom.

I do not feel that matters of equality and religion should ever ever be put up to vote. But nor do i agree with judging people based on their belifes.

My husband and I are Catholic. Sadly we have people assume that we voted to ban gay marriage in florida when they find out because of it. We didn't.

We are raising our daughter catholic and have been told "so your raising her to hate anyone who's diffrent I see."
We aren't.

Saying someone doesn't have the right to marry or have the same legal protection a married couple is because they are gay is in my opinion just as wrong as accusing all people who are christian of being the reason the laws did not pass.

Further more as a teacher I have to wonder what exactly this whole "teaching about being gay" in school thing is. Is this like black history month? Are we going o be teaching about the struggles this community has had like we talk about the plight of the american indian? I highly doubt they will be having us pop in dvd's of "queer as folk' and "The L Word." just sayin.

Anonymous said...

What grade do teachers teach marriage in school? My kids are in 1st grade and we haven't gotten to that part of the curriculum yet. They're still on addition and subtraction and spelling and stuff.

Anonymous said...

Yes, that darn "gay agenda," trying to force sin on our children.

Just like that darn "black agenda," trying to force acceptance of an inferior race on our children in the 50s and 60s.


Atheist Mama said...

ITA with the anonymous comment above ("The gay agenda" being tolerance)!

What do some people think? That homosexuals are out to get you? Convert your children? Geez...that is SO ignorant.

A few other things:

I'm really really really tired of Christians acting like they are the persecuted minority, when it is quite obvious to the handful of us that *aren't* Christians that they are actually the majority in control.

Marriage isn't just a "religious" institution. I had a completely god-free, religion-free wedding/marriage in April and it was just as valid as anyone's god-packed ceremony.

Lastly, there are MUCH more important things to think about and petition and try to pass laws about other than gay marriage!

People are starving, being raped, kidnapped...why are we wasting so much of our resources on trying to stop something that is harmless?

Sure, if you are a christian you don't believe it's harmless, I get that. You believe it's going to send you to hell and so on and so forth...but really - that's only "harming" the one committing the supposed "sin" who cares? Why do YOU care?

Mooooooove on already and start actually doing something to better the people that live in this world instead of trying to rule over other peoples lives!

It's nuts!

Atheist Mama said...


I kind of wanted to echo what another person said...

This topic has nothing to do with how your family happily thrives on $1000 or less. I almost cringed when I saw what this post was well as when I saw your diet recommendations...also having nothing to do with the ultimate theme of your blog.

Now...I'm not your boss (lol!) and can't tell you what to do, nor do I want to - but I will make a recommendation :P

I'd either change the description of THIS blog, or start using that other blog you have to post off-topic things.

I'm guilty of posting random, non-homemaker things on my blog as well, but in my description I admit to doing this, so you kind of know what to expect.

Anyway - I still dig your blog and plan on continue to stalk it (haha!). I just wanted to put this out there.

Anonymous said...

As a Christian, I don't want my religion forced on others because one day if we are NOT the majority I don't want to be forced to live according to another religion's rules. Furthermore, many would say your lack of nutrition and want of small living space is detrimental to your children. But it is your right to live as you wish. So..if you don't want the government to tell you how to live, why do you want to tell other Americans they are unequal to you?!

Shallow Gal said...

You are a pretty cool chick. Very few people are able to look at both sides of an issue like you have here. I'm really impressed.

Deanna said...

*Nice* doesn't cut it when you're talking about the rights of individuals. A Yes vote meant looking at people in your community and deciding "You are less worthy than I am." I have enjoyed your blog thus far, especially since I grew up in Maine and am always looking for ways to be thrifty, but I cannot in good conscience continue to read it, especially if you make money from what you write here. I love my home state but I am ashamed of 52% of its inhabitants.

Amber said...

Remember... it's Majority rule, minority RIGHTS. The minority groups are granted rights to be free from persecution from the majority. That's why your legislators overturned the "will of the people." As you well know, the majority of people in the south were against integration. It didn't matter that they were against it because it did not allow for minority rights.

This is the civil rights fight of our generation. I am a conservative, fundamental Baptist and I do believe that homosexuality is an abberation from God's plan. However, my religious views cannot cloud politics as the politica arena is to be religion free.

Jill said...

The basic civil rights of a minority group should never be decided and controlled by the majority. Basic civil rights should be protected for all people even if they're in the minority.

Your argument about the "will of the people" is weak.

Kat said...

Please stick to blogging about about frugality. I read your blog for that, not for your politics. You're alienating your readers. not cool.

crabcakes said...

UU's do not use the bible as their religious law. Their tenets are centered on a theme that we are do be good to each other in all things and that each person's path to god is different.

A UU man and woman can marry even though they are not bible believers. An athiest man and woman can certainly be married.

Marriage is not only a religious institution. People who are non-religious can marry and people who are religious can be married to someone of the same sex in their churches.

As for the goat thing. No one is advocating a free for all. A goat can not consent to marriage. Two men who love each other or two women who love each other can.

If you believe the bible, then don't marry someone of the same sex. But what does it have to do with me? My religion is just as valid and my church has no problem with my marriage.

crabcakes said...

And if you want to relate it to being thrifty. Just remember that those of us in marriages to another person of the same sex are paying extra taxes for you.

While my marriage is recognized in my state and several others, the federal government does not recognize it. If my wife dies, I won't get her social security even though we both pay into it. If she were a man, I would. Our health insurance is taxed by the federal government as supplimental income. If I were to die, anything I leave to her will be taxed federally.

I pay equal sales tax, equal employment tax, equal housing tax. I pay the same taxes as every other citizen. But I don't get all of the same benefits in return. How thrifty is that?

Joy said...

Longtime lurker; first time commenter. I really enjoy your blog, Emily. The only thing we have in common is that we are both SAHMs raising a family on a single income but I'm here daily nonetheless. All this to say: Atheist Mama - you're my kind of gal!

Anonymous said...

I, too, would like there to be another blog for issues about this or change the title/description so those who enter can read cautiously. It's easy to get sucked into reading the comments and wrapped up in the "drama." Ultimately it's your choice, but I have stopped visiting other blogs who try to tackle unresolvable issues.

Lyndsae said...


I understand that this post is on a vote regarding homosexuality, but you raise a bigger issue. You said that you believe in the will of the people over the government. Would you feel the same way if "the people" passed a law that negatively impacted you and your family? What if the people voted to pass an amendment requiring all children to be vaccinated, without exceptions? What is the people required all parents to send their children to public school? Would you depend on the government to restore your rights?

Most of our laws guaranteeing personal freedoms have been passed and/or inforced by Supreme Court decisions, not by the voters.

I find it troubling that you take such pride in your personal freedoms (religion, immunizations, homeschooling, etc.), but don't feel that other people should be entitled to their personal freedom.

Simple in France said...

Wow! Brave post. Frankly, I've gotten in such rows with my nearest and dearest over this topic that I cringed when I read the title! But you pulled it off.

I agree with a lot of people in this discussion--that gay mariage should perhaps not be subject to a vote because the right to the pursuit of happiness and equality under the law should not be up to a vote. That's why we have the bill of rights.

But your argument makes sense to me too for the following reason: why did Maine decide to even put such an issue on the balot only to take it away? Either it is or it isn't something people should be able to vote on. You shouldn't put it up for a vote and then say, 'ooops, that didn't turn out the way we wanted!'

Think about it--can you imagine if someone said, "Hey, let's put up interacial mariage for a vote again." I doubt a vote like that would be allowed since it's violating basic rights guaranteed by the constitution. Again, the problem is that there was a vote in the first place.

Also, I too hate when either 'side' of a contentious political debate twists things and wrongfully incriminates the other side. If it's the 'other side' it makes my side look bad unfairly. If it's 'my side' then I get lumped in with a group that's engaging in shady politics.

Emily, in reading your blog, I realize there are a LOT of things that you and I fundamentally disagree on AND that I really resepct you. I respect the fact that you are an independent, rational thinker and that you can have a well-reasoned conversation--and keep the discussion on your blog well-reasoned too. Most impressive!

Emily said...

Overall an interesting discussion, although it had little to do with my post. I said in the post that I thought that banning gay marriage wouldn't lead more to follow Christ, which is what I ultimately care about, but I don't like the will of the people disregarded. The POINT of the post was that I don't like people lying to get their way, even if it is an outcome I favor.

Clisby, with each administration, the freedoms of the people are being thrown away more and more. I think this will lead to the collapse of our government structure as we know it and a dictatorial gov't will come in. When that happens, real Christians, not just church-goers, but real Christians who are compelled by the Holy Spirit to practice righteousness, will stand up for what is right. Christians at that point will become the target.

For those that think I shouldn't write about this, it is my blog. I have never hid from tough issues, and I don't think that disagreeing with LYING in a political campaign should be all that controversial. For those that read the whole post, not just skimmed it to find something they disagree with, would have seen that. But if I wanted to talk about my views on gay rights, I think I could, since it is my blog. It is how we "thrive" and thriving means more to me than staying financially afloat. It is about quality of life, and my political and religious views are part of that.

Clisby said...

"... with each administration, the freedoms of the people are being thrown away more and more."

Maine voters seem awfully eager to toss away freedom.

Andrew Wilder said...

Can someone please explain to me exactly how two men (or two women) being married will hurt your own heterosexual marriage?

To this day, I've never heard a salient argument that actually convinces me that my marriage to another man would in any way, shape, or form denigrate another couple's marriage.

And to those of you who claim "civil unions are just as good," I'd like to remind you that "Separate But Equal" DOES NOT WORK.

Anonymous said...

As a Christian I don't understand how anyone can speak about "what God hates." God is love. He just accepts and loves.

Speaking about being "Christian" and how that gives you a free pass to being close-minded is complete BS to me.

If a man wants to marry another man (or woman/woman) I say go for it. I happily helped my gay friends get married because I am fortunate enough to live in Massachusetts. God is love. Who am I to pass judgment on ANYONE?

Anonymous said...

There is a massive difference between gay marriage and brother-marrying-sister or (I can't believe you even used it as an example) person-marrying-animal. Massive.

You can't even compare the two.

When you say that, you're also saying that homosexuals are no better than animals. Is that what you intended to say?

Marriage between two consenting people who love each other has no bearing on you, unless one of those people is you or your partner. If you really think you're so important that your life is infected (yes, infected, because I'm sure that's how you feel) by two people you may or may not know choosing to enter into a contract binding them together you need to take a step back and wash the narccicism off.

You want to believe it's wrong? Fine. Don't marry someone who is your gender.

crabcakes said...

When you refer to the will of the people though, Emily...which people?

53% of the people? What about the other 47%? There really isn't that much of a difference.

"The people" means ALL of us. 53% isn't really enough of a majority to be classified as the will of "the people".

The people are divided. The will of 47% of "the people" is that I get to stay married.

Hope that makes sense.

Emily said...

crabcakes, it takes less than 53% to elect a president, and the rest are disappointed, that's how the system is set up. I don't think we'll be seeing 100% in agreement any time soon. And when it does pass in Maine, it will probably pass by a hair over 50%, and the rest will be left disappointed. The people will still be divided.

I agree with your earlier comment that 53% is pretty low and shows that more people are supporting gay marriage. Many saw that as a small victory of it's own, because next time it comes up to a vote, it may pass.

Unlike most Christians, I don't find legislating morality helpful to our cause, especially if we can only do it by demonstrating our own depravity in a deceitful campaign. It really is a gov't v. people thing for me.

Andrew Wilder said...

Emily, I didn't realize that Christianity was a "cause."

Emily said...

Andrew, the cause is to help others know Christ. I don't think Christians have ever hidden that. As I said, I don't see how making some things illegal will help me to help my mother, neighbor or friend know Christ.

Andrew Wilder said...


I'm biting my tongue because I'm sure we will disagree on many things, and we're getting a bit off-topic... But, I will say that I greatly appreciate the respectful and civilized manner in which you and your readers state your opinions. Thanks for not letting these comments drift into a "flame war." I also appreciate tremendously the whole point of this thread--that we should all play nice. :-)


K said...

"What is wrong with just teaching out children acceptance of others and to see them for who they are as a person and not by gender, the color of their skin, or their sexual preference?"

Who said there is anything wrong with this? I teach my children all of these things. I also teach them to strive daily to reject sin. And, I don't allow them to attempt to justify their sin. We are all sinners from the moment we are born, and it is our responsibility to have the self-control to reject our sinful natures.

I am not afraid--I am disappointed--that so many people these days make no attempts to reject the sin in their lives, and that they actively attempt to persuade others into thinking that it is normal, acceptable, and should be legalized. And, it's disappointing that so many people have fallen for it...

Anonymous said...

Do you believe homosexuality is immoral? If so, according to Hebrews 13:4(NIV), the issue of "gay marriage" is wrong.
"Marriage should be honored by all, and the marriage bed kept pure, for God will judge the adulterer and all the sexually immoral."
Read the WORD and allow the Holy Spirit to show you what constitutes "immorality".
"Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God." 1 Corinthians 6:9-10
Seek God and read the Bible for the truth. Do not depend on your own "beliefs" or "understandings". Be wise and fear God.
"I tell you, my friends, do not be afraid of those who kill the body and after that can do no more. But I will show you whom you should fear: Fear him who after the killing of the body, has the power to throw you in hell." Luke 12:4-5
"The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge, but fools despise wisdom and discipline." Proverbs 1:7
"But dear friends, remember what the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ foretold. They said to you, 'In the last times there will be scoffers who will follow their own ungodly desires.' These are the men who divided you, who follow mere natural instincts and do not have the Spirit. But you, dear friends, build yourselves up in your most holy faith and pray in the Holy Spirit. Keep yourselves in God's love as you wait for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ to bring you to eternal life. Be merciful to those who doubt; snatch others from the fire and save them; to others show mercy, mixed with fear - hating even the clothing stained by corrupted flesh." Jude verse 17

Emily said...

Anon, believing something is wrong is different than believing that it should be illegal. Being homosexual cannot be made illegal, nor can lying, but lying is part of the TEN COMMANDMENTS, and is no doubt immoral. Those opposing the gay marriage in my state DID LIE to win votes. That is morally apprehensible to me, but I will no sooner be petitioning making lying illegal than I will be petitioning to ban gay marriage. It's a big leap for one to say that EVERYthing that they believe is wrong should be illegal, and those that think that way should really think that through.

Chrysalis said...


Good job staying level headed in your thoughts on this.
But some of your commenters are really walking into loony land.
To compare gay marriage to marrying an animal is insane. An animal does not hold legal status and cannot legally sign a marriage certificate.
To insinuate that allowing gay marriage will somehow indoctrinate our children or make them gay is certifiable. If this were the case, then there would BE no gay people. Sexual orientation is nto a choice nor can it be "taught".
To anyone who wants to imply that a tax paying citizens rights should be tossed aside simply because of who they choose to love, well, you demean yoruself by even saying that outloud. Shame on you.
And finally, regardless of what the bible tells you or what you think you believe, consider the reality of this situation. By putting this issue in the hands of the "people", we have allowed the "people" to dictate who dies alone. Who gets to raise a child. Who makes decisions on an individual should they get critically injured. How would you like the "people" dicating that you will not be permitted to see your spouse when he or she is dying, not be entitled to participate in end of life decisions or worse, have your child taken from you?
These are people we are talking about, real humans, not subjects of legislature and it is irresponsible to dismiss this fact when voting to decide if they will or will not have basic rights as a taxpaying American. This country is NOT a theocracy, regardless of what one believes we were founded on, it is not the case today. Don't believe me? Ask a Jew. Or should they have their rights taken as well, because they believe different than the "Christian Majority"?
Like it or not, Chirsitans choose every day exactly which one of the Lords words they will or will not follow. There's not one peron who lives the bible as it was written. Not one. So since we are all picking and chosing anyway, why not chose love and compassion instead of hate?
Give it a try, you'll feel better.


Emily said...


"who dies alone. Who gets to raise a child. Who makes decisions on an individual should they get critically injured."

These rights are already protected under domestic partnership laws in our state. These rights were not what the vote was about, since homosexuals in our state already have these rights.

I disagree with anyone advocating a theocracy in America, but I don't disagree with people voting their conscience, which may or may not have been molded by the word of God.

I think love and compassion goes both ways. You could certainly disagree with other commentators civilly without saying they are in "loony land" or calling them "insane." Give it a try, you'll feel better.

Chrysalis said...


I am glad they are protected in your state under DP laws. They are not everywhere and that is sad. And they are not protected by the Federal Government.

Incidenally, I did not call any commenters insane, I called comparing gay marriage to marrying an animal insane. And it is. think about it. And to put that idea out there as anything reasonable is certainly walking into loony land.

You have no idea how far my love and compassion goes. Seriously, you don't. I feel very strongly about this. I have watched gay peole die alone. I have also ministered to gay people who have been beat half to death by "chritians" who believe they deserve it.
Gay is not a choice. God makes you who you are. It is absolutely loony to use the word of God to persecute another person and that is how some of your commenters come off.
that said, I am simply expressing my opinon. I have been around the block to know that this will not change anyones mind.

Katie said...

Emily: If 53% of your state voted that Christian marriage should be illegal, would you say "Oh well, majority rules" and be "disappointed" and get over it?

Post a Comment